“Dental Appliances: Problems with Acrylic”
By John Diamond, M.D.
I once saw three students who were patients of three different dentists, all highly skilled. These students each had a different type of acrylic appliance. They had been checked by their respective dentists, and all the appliances had been found to be of great benefit. In each case, however, we discovered that the student was allergic to the acrylic and thus was being harmed at the same time as he was being helped.
For example, one patient had an appliance to build up the lower molars. It was found that when she inserted the appliance and clenched her teeth gently, so as to achieve the balance that the appliance was designed to accomplish, she remained unstressed. But as soon as she opened her mouth, so that the appliance was in a sense no longer activating the meridian system, she became stressed, due to the allergic effect of the acrylic.
The appliances were all perfectly balanced and thus were achieving the desired effect, but only when the teeth were occluded. As soon as the mouth was opened and this positive effect was no longer obtained, the negative effect of the plastic prevailed. Obviously the patient was not supposed to walk around with her teeth clenched or touching all the time, and every time she did not have her teeth occluded she was being harmed by the acrylic.
All that was necessary was for the dentist to keep pieces of the various forms of acrylic, have the patient put them in her mouth one by one, and test whether or not she was allergic to any of them before the appliance was made. Furthermore, when the appliance had been made it should have been kinesiologically tested: firstly, in position, and, secondly, in the mouth but out of position. In position, it should strengthen. Out of position, it must not weaken. If it does, the patient is allergic to the acrylic.
